To the new communications and transportation capabilities that weve developed. Given the shifting culture and those expectations for speed and ontime delivery, im reluctant. You have to look at the economics of all of this and the trade offs and costs, but i hate to see the Postal Service give up one, two, three. Thank you. Mr. Miller. Mr. Chairman two things. One, as i recollect, the rational for this change in Service Standards was developed after i left. I dont know the details of it. I hesitate to answer because without having time to analyze the data. Second, there is a trade off obviously. You cant do all things for all people. You have to make some choices here. Service standards should be an input into the question of plant and logistical rationalization it seems to me. I just dont have i dont have my hands on the information necessary i understand. Everything else equal. I think theres something nice about having as you characterize, a one, two, three kind of standard. You wou
The centers changed the standard of delivery and gone from one, two, three, days to modified one so au so if youre in the same met oe metropolitan area. Thats modified one. If were outside the area, you might get it. You may not. Modified one, two, three. I think the Postal Service would like to go to two, three. Two day even in the same metropolitan area. It would be one but two would be the expectation and three. In terms of whats appropriate for us, im not comfortable with the Postal Service saying this is how many Mail Processing centers we should have. Some people say the more appropriate thing for us to do maybe with the involvement of the Regulatory Commission is to consider whether or not modified one, two, three days of service is appropriate. One, two, three is better or two, three is just fine. I would welcome any comments that you all have in it regard. Ms. Kennedy. I picked on mr. Miller all afternoon. Maybe i should come to you. My first thought is if we have declining fi